• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AR-15 Rifles: The instruments of slaughter & murder in America

What they “believed” came to fruition since they were able to murder almost 200 people between the 6 of them.
Nevermind, it's in the OP.

Well, first, you gotta subtract 1/4 of your body count, the pulse night club was not done using an AR-15.

Second, take that same timeline, and withing, calculate how many casualties from NON ar-15 mass murders. The ar-15 numbers will be dwarfed. Why?
 
The few mass murderers who are dumb enough to choose the AR-15 as their weapon of choice to kill large numbers of civilians do so for theatrical purposes. They generally admire other mass murderers who did the same, and they equate the look and media reputation of the AR-15 to personal power. They use an AR-15 because it subjectively makes them feel powerful, and they are either willing to sacrifice lethality for this, or are blessedly dumb enough to not understand what makes a firearm effective in a mass shooting scenario. Or else they are resigned to suicide and don't care about being immediately shot by police or an armed bystander.

Concealable handguns and spare magazines loaded with hollow point ammunition are tactically way more efficient weapons to kill large numbers of civilians in an enclosed area than AR-15's are for a large number of reasons. In fact, the only real advantages AR-15's and other sporting rifles would have over handguns in a mass shooting scenario is better accuracy at longer range, (which is completely lost in close range rapid fire scenarios, which are the majority of mass shootings,) and armor piercing capability, (an added concern only for law enforcement officers who are rarely the targets of mass shooters. A civilian isn't going to experience any difference between getting shot with an AR-15 or a 9mm.)

Magazine capacity is a wash because, while AR-15 magazines hold more rounds, the magazines themselves are much bigger and heavier, so fewer can be carried on the person, and it is harder to conceal them.

Damage to soft targets is a wash, because at point blank range, (the most common range that mass shootings happen) an AR-15 round is more likely to pass completely through a soft target making a smaller hole and doing far less damage than the larger, slower pistol round. At close range against a soft target like a civilian, a pistol round is no less deadly than an AR-15 round, and is quite often more deadly. Unless you are shooting at longer ranges from a concealed position, handguns make more sense. And other rifles besides AR-15's make more sense if you are shooting long distance from a concealed position. Most hunting rifles have more lethality and accuracy at longer ranges than AR-15's do.

Concealability is where the real advantage lies when it comes to mass shootings. A man with an AR-15 is an obvious target as the Greenwood Park Mall shooting proves. A man with a handgun could kill 18 people as fast as he can pull the trigger, and either surreptitiously reload and continue multiple times, or holster the weapon and join the fleeing victims to get away.

There is no tactical advantage to using an AR-15 or any other sporting rifle in a civilian mass shooting scenario. It is an ego move and nothing else.

It sure has been effective as an “ego move” since the six listed murdered almost 200 people between them.
 
Deflection. That’s all I ever get from the gun wackos. Why are they so afraid to answer this question in a straight-forward and honest manner?

You have got a lot of answers. A lot of thoughtful responses. Sadly, none of them match your predetermined answer, that is the only one you will accept. Your question is rhetorical and intended as nothing more than a launching pad for your partisan, ill-informed blather.
 
It sure has been effective as an “ego move” since the six listed murdered almost 200 people between them.
A tiny fraction of the number of people who have been killed by handguns.
 
Eliminate the nightclub massacre and then the others averaged “only” 30 killed in a very short period of time. Is that really better?
They would have averaged a hell of a lot more had they chosen a more efficient weapon for the job.
 
What is the "actual ammo" used in the AR-15?

See, here's where you guys get in trouble. You're trying to make a technical argument about something you know very little about.

Hint: There are many many sorts of "actual ammo" used in AR-15 rifles. It is very likely chambered for more variety than any other model of firearm. That's why it appears to the knowledgeable that you are trying to make some claim about the terminal ballistics depending in some manner on the model of rifle that fired the (unspecified) cartridge. That's ludicrous to the knowledgeable, but the ignorant might nod their heads in dumb agreement.
Wanna really rattle them? No one really talks of twist 1:7, 1:9 etc.
 
You have got a lot of answers. A lot of thoughtful responses. Sadly, none of them match your predetermined answer, that is the only one you will accept. Your question is rhetorical and intended as nothing more than a launching pad for your partisan, ill-informed blather.



Psychological projection.
 
I am talking actual fact, not goal post moving hypothetical deflections. I am talking about the actual ammo used in the AR-15. Please pay better attention.
"Actual ammo" as opposed to what other?
 
Wanna really rattle them? No one really talks of twist 1:7, 1:9 etc.

I've brought it up before in the context of claims it was designed to have a tumbling bullet. I wondered if that was true, why they took steps to stabilize the bullet and looked at that as an improvement.
 
Why do you think everything you can't respond to is "deflection?"
Because he can’t respond to it and it destroys his little rant of course.
 
What a totally ridiculous statement/deflection/lie. Is that really the best you can do?
No, but it's the truth. So why elaborate.
You can't hide an AR in your pocket. Yet another reason to thousands of criminals chose a handgun, eh?
Nah you just shove it down the front of your pants.
 
Do you have data on the number of mass hacking incidents in the US?
In other words, yet another totally ridiculous deflection from you.
I'm not saying we have mass hacking ups here, only does getting hacked up count as being slaughtered?
 
Oh I guess I should have been clearer. Pretty much what I meant to him was WTF is actual?
My 9mm actually fires 9mm though there are actually different bullet grains but actually all 9mm. I'm an AK person and tend to forget ARs are more versatile.:)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom